Disqus - Friends of gwynethd

Re: Fernando C. Debacle

proudrepublican — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:12:43 -0000

Lets not worry about the Florida Rep, we have our own State Senator from Las Cruces who made equally offensive comments to the Rockey Mountain News and Tracy you have nothing to say about that?????? Could it be because you put party above all else and she happens to be a democrat and C de Baca who's comments are wrong is a Republican? Why does it pain you liberals to at least be consistent????

Re: Do the right thing, Democrats

proudrepublican — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:07:07 -0000

Jeeter I have to say you are a hypocrit and after seeing your remarks to my column I hope you never agree with me on anything. I have been accused of a lot in my life but racism has never been one of them, I can not believe the depths you will go to give Senator Garcia cover and to say that she is a "obscure" State Senator when she is the Democrat Whip in the Senate is like saying Thomas Jefferson was just your average citizen! You my friend just go to prove how intellectually dishonest liberals are and once again Republicans do the right thing and you are either to afraid, partisan or ignorant to admit your mistake and correct it, I bet it is a little of all three.........

Re: Do the right thing, Democrats

proudrepublican — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 11:31:12 -0000

Jeeter I am not have not argued with you once but as is proof by your comments when ever Liberals are wrong they just attack. You can attack me all you want you still have not answered or offered up any proof to counter my column other then your own twisted opinion. I my friend stated facts something that is always missign from your comments.

As to my political care all I can say is far better to actually have had one then to be like yourself who hides behind a "code name" and attacks everyone. How come you Liberals are alwasy so right but afraid to put your name next to what you say at least I sign what I write.

With all that said keep reading and helping prove my point everytime you write something the GOP picks up 5 more votes from people who read this blog.

Re: Do the right thing, Democrats

proudrepublican — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:52:56 -0000

Jeeter just by asking what have Repubs done in the state house for civil rights shows how little you even respect the actual civil rights movement. My record as a legislator and the bills I have introduced are open to anyone who wnats to see them, and once again my REAL name is on them. I will not even bother explaining Blackdom and Roswell to you because it will fall on deaf ears.

For you to try and accuse me of attacking is laughable you have said nothing to refute my column other then to attack me, the party and then ask some crazy off the wall comment like "what have Repubs done in the Legislature"? What I have written is clearly factual and checkable your comments are nothing more then hate filled rhetoric that I guess in your tiny mind is factual. Asking what Republicans have done in the NM Legislature and trying to equate that to civil right once again shows your ignorance or this issue and the political processs. Remember you and your fellow LIBERALS wanted civil rights to be a states rights issue so you could continue to promote slavery, Jim Crow Laws, Grandfather clauses and WHite Primaries to name only a few. It was the GOP that made it a Federal issue (with the help and support of RFK and JFK) but your good frineds like Robert Byrd and Al Gores father that tried to fight it all the way.

Even other Liberals who have integrity and a shred of common sense have called out Mary Jane on her comments so come on out of the cave the war is over you are the only one really left fighting, but that should come as no suprise to you orthers who know you.

Now Jeeter I am done educating your ignorant butt because it once again will fall on deaf ears, keep reading and writting you are the best thing to happen to the GOP in a long long time......

Re: Let’s talk about ‘verbal terrorism’

proudrepublican — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:49:49 -0000

reyrey, your response about Republicans and Democrats is false, and history and current events don't support a single comment you just made. Every US Senator and House member who voted against the Civil Rights Act died a Democrat. You continue to spew false statements about history and thank god we have actual documents to rely on not your revisionist comments.

ACORN is trying to steal an election and Obama gave them $800,000.00 but I am sure you all can care less but if McCain gave that money to them and they were using it to advance Republican candidates you would all be upset, the difference between us is so would I.

Any time someone works to ruin our election process we should all be up in arms, anyone who destroys our elction process is a traitor and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Having Obama paying these guys shows you how much he cares about protecting the process. This is a right that people have died to protect and having a commander and chief who supports destroying the election process is equally insulting.

I never said that Obama supporters were "brown beaten" so you need to correct your comments!

If Obama has nothing to hide then answer the questions and come clean, stop getting the "mainstream media" to carry his water. McCain and Palin have said nothing about race it is the Obama crew who keeps brining up race.

Re: Let’s talk about ‘verbal terrorism’

proudrepublican — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:11:24 -0000

reyrey I am going to go through your comments so you can see my response and so can everyone else who reads this:

"Who cares if someone died a Democrat or changed parties (like Strom Thrumond--who did change to Republican) for what happened back then?"

You said earlier that "many left the democrat party to become republicans" I was pointing out that was not true period!

"What's significant is that even some who railed against civil rights, like Robert Byrd and even George Wallace himself to some extent, repudiated their past racist leanings and that we've arrived at where we are today."

This just is not true Wallace died a racist and Byrd has continued to make comments and get quoted with his hate comments look them up. I think once you were a Grand Dragon in the clan it is hard to believe you have changed, what changed was society and he has come along kicking and screaming.

"Please show me specifically how the current Republican Party Platform is not decisive (and how the Dem one is)."

I think you mean divisive but I am not sure. The fact is the Republican Party platform and philosophy has not changed EVER! We are still the only party that was founded on a moral platform and that was to do away with slavery. The democrats continue to pander to minorities and Republicans don't. Just look at the positions that blacks have held in the Bush administration and comapre that to the democrats.

"I'm upset not by what ACORN does"

How can you not be upset by a group that is clearly breaking the law in multiple states? Come on registering someone 70 times or turning in names like Mickey Mouse! Trying to get people to believe that during the last election s theif broke in and stole ONLY the Republican registrations? If the fact they are destroying our system doesn't upset you then I guess we will agree to disagree.

"Please show me how current New Mexican Republicans like C de Baca and his supporters aren't racist."

You are proving my point when you bring him up, once Republicans found out about his comments they called for him to step down. Yet Sen Mary Jane Garcia makes offensive remarks and not a single democrat has called on her to resign or even offer up an apology. When Republicans see this kind of thing we take action democrats just ignore it and hope it goes away.

"Finally, your attacks at the "mainstream media" ring pretty hollow. You are the mainstream media (notice I didn't put quotes around it like you did)."

I am not the mainstrream media, I am a columnist who is not afraid to tell you who I am and how I am registered. Nobody reads my column and believes they are getting the news they are getting my opinion, so there is a big difference between what I do and what MSNBC, NBC and the New York Times does!

Due to time constraints I am trying to get something back to you quick but I have to go for a while and actually work there are millions on welfare who are depending on me! I apprecaite your comments just disagree with you and unlike Obama and his crowd I don't think you are a racist, wrong, but not a racist. I will try to respond to more later tonight.

Dan Foley

Re: Let’s talk about ‘verbal terrorism’

proudrepublican — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:37:59 -0000

pari let me first address your comments concerning the McCain Camp and the comments that someone yelled from the crowd, I guess you forgot that McCain disagreed with those comments and said so publicly he even addressed the people who yelled that comment. A fact that was not lost on Obama who thanked him for doing that but I guess you forgot to mention that right?

Last time I checked it was the Republicans who have had to hire security because Obama has said to do what ever it takes yelling, screaming getting in their face what ever it takes but I guess that is another fact you fail to mention. The only people wanting this kind of response is Obama supporters who are doing this and receive support from Barrack and his comments.

now to you reyrey:

You make no sense what so ever, the quotes I used were to address your comments not mine you need to read your prior posts before you try to twist what I am saying in response to you.

I will try to address your points once again but just so you don't think I am afraid to touch on the subject I am going to ignore your hateful comments were you are only trying to attack me instead of offer any real comments.

I assure you I have read the party platform and I understand it I am not going to go step by step for you feel free to read it yourself and draw your own conclusion. I can tell you that the policies of Republicans from school vouchers to welfare reform from preventing voter fraud to personal responsability is far better for ALL Americans not just one group over another. On the other hand the Democrats and their quotas and their desire to keep kids in failing schools are bad for ALL Americans and that my friend is a great example of the differences in the two parties and how they are hurting not just minorities but ALL Americans.

I know the platform changes every four years but thank you for pointing that out! I guess the underlying philosophy of the Republican Party of working towards a color blind society has remained the same and that is not so for the Democrat party that continues to try and draw a line and promotes class as well as racial warfare. I have outlined this above in the differences of the two parties, I mentioned only a few because I am sure you will be unable to keep up with any more then that.

You say I am only talking about the past but I point out the very recent Bush administration as an example of what party is actually "doing more" for minorities so I am not sure why you keep saying I am only talking about the past.

Give me the names of the "racist" that are hiding in the Republican party, becasue I have not seen them or heard about them. If you want to talk about people like AL Sharpton and his hate for Jews and the Democrats that continue to encourage hate by promoting racism then that falls right at your parties feet. Whenever anything racist surfaces we as Republicans address it right away look what my party did when David Duke tried to run for Governor we openly oppossed him not the same with your party, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Robert Byrd and the long list of former members of your party that fought the Civil Rights Act and went on to live out the remainder of their lives as Democrats. So once again my friend you are flat out wrong with your comments and no matter how many names you call me or how many times you repeat yourself you are wrong, period.

You say that we as a party didn't stand up to the comments of Fernando, well what do you call the State Chairman, Congressional Candidate and US Senator calling for him to resign? What is wrong with you are you totally nuts! Your State Chairman and the Speaker of the House have said nothing about Mary Jane Garcia's racist comments in the Rocky Mountain News so come on reyrey get real you are going so far over board you are loosing any sense of credability, if you can't see that then there is nothing I can do to help you.

I guess we will agree to disagree about me being the mainstream media I am not a reporter I don't know how to say that any clearer then that to you, but I am starting to realize that no matter what I say you are unable to understand it anyway. You say I don't have my facts correct and need a fact checker, I challange you to point to the part in my article that is wrong, come on give me one fact that proves I am wrong. I don't want your opinion I want a fact!

Earlier you tell me I have not read the platform then you accuse me of spewing the "party line" come on reyrey which is it? You can't even keep it together long enough to prevent yourself from trying to take both sides of an argument. I continue to write fact based articles with my opinion thrown in you my friend would not know a fact even if your party bosses gave it to you on a plate. With that said I am done educating you, it really would help if you would read a little history before you make bold statements that expose how little you actually know about politics and history, but I am glad you are reading the articles keep it up!

School is out I am done educating you, maybe you should have paid attention when you were in school. Instead of writting me back go to the local library (that is the building with all the books) and read a little about history and stop relying on TV, the internet and the Democrat talking points for your facts.

Thank you and good night

Dan Foley

Re: Let’s talk about ‘verbal terrorism’

proudrepublican — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:26:45 -0000

It was the Democrats who--for the first time--in 1964 finally supported a civil rights bill.

That is indisputable. Republicans continued to support civil rights in much, much higher percentages in Congress in both the CRA and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. And actually it was just the Johnson Administration that actually embraced the Republican
concept of Civil Rights. Kennedy (and Johnson prior to 1964) had been cool at best and his Administration got no legislation through.

Democrats came to the Republican position--equal protection of the laws, a color-blind society-- in 1964 and stayed there till 1967 or 68. They then began to substitute new “concepts” for civil rights, including racial preferences, set-asides, race-based hiring, admissions, et cetera. Republicans stayed with their original position.

Actually, it was the influx of Yankees--like former Georgia Senator (first Republican since Reconstruction) Mack Mattingly-- that provided the candidates and the votes to defeat the lower middle class dominated white Democrats who were allied with very liberal black voters on a range of social welfare issues--and still wrong on civil rights. What some apparently believe is a recent “trend” and “influx” started in the 60s and provided
tremendous Republican votes throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s in almost all Southern states.

I'm maybe the only member of the New Mexico Legislature to have had the privilege of an evening-long conversation with Michael Barone, Editor of The Almanac of American Politics, Fox News Political analyst, and by all accounts the nation's leading political demographer. Barone told me he started out as a liberal Democrat in the late 60s, but admits that history has taught him, and continues to teach him day in and day out, that much of American political mythology is just that, mythology. In other words it's the bad mythology, the kind of storytelling that doesn't leave behind an essential truth.

Political Scientist V. O. Key documented the surge of the Republican vote in the South beginning in the early 50s. And it had everything to do with the same phenomenon that Barone identifies: culture. A middle-class, religious, tradition-bound rural or rural-influenced cultural conservatism.

Democrats of the late 60s through the 70s, and arguably up to this day, identified, and identify with what was generally termed the "counter-culture." Republicans didn't. This phenomenons, and more accurately, outgrowths from it, have gained a tremendous number of adherents in all regions of the country, but it has been slower to catch on, or to gain a majority in the culturally conservative South.

Southerners by the 1970s weren't fighting segregation. They were fighting against radical secularism, against the people who had fought to get prayer out of schools, and the Ten Commandments off public buildings and crèches from courthouse lawns, and who had made abortion on demand the law of the land, and who wanted to do away with the death penalty.

Democrats tried to deny that was what they faced for one simple reason: by the late 70s it was clear their party had moved so far to the Left they weren't going to change those positions. So, admitting what the problems were with their cultural modern liberalism was a losing proposition. It felt better, and left them feeling superior to attribute their loss of the South to race. But as Barone points out over and over, they knew this was not true.

Democrats who actually voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964:

Robert Byrd, still a Democrat, still in the Senate

Albert Gore, Sr., remained a Democrat, defeated in 1970 by pro-civil rights Republican

Herbert S. Walters, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

John J. Sparkman, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

Lister Hill, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

J. William Fullbright, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

John McClellan, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

Herman Talmadge, defeated by Republican Mack Mattingly in 1980, died a Democrat.

Richard Russell, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

Allen Ellender, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

Russell Long, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

John Stennis, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

James O. Eastland, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

B. Everett Jordan, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

Sam Ervin, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

Olin Johnston, died a Democrat, never denounced his vote

A. Willis Robertson, subsequently defeated in Democrat Primary, died a Democrat in 1971

Harry F. Byrd, Jr., died a Democrat, never denounced his vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dan Foley

Re: Voter fraud, a GOP bete noire, rears its head again in the presidential race

proudrepublican — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 15:42:13 -0000

I have to say what worries me the most has to be the desire by the media to make this into a political issue. Breaking the law and registering people illegally is flat out wrong and the media would rather try to turn this into a political issue then a legal issue. I have to tell you I don't care who it is doing this but no matter who it has to be stopped, no race is more important then upholding the integrity of the election process.

When we found out about voter fraud in an election in Roswell by a Republican we wanted that person brought to justice we did not try to ignore it or say that this was a "political attack" we got to the bottom of it and held the people accountable, the media should do the same here. Pointing out that an organization who was given $800,000.00+ by a Presidential candidate is under investigation for destroying our election process is news and it should worry everyone who is paying attention. It is not John McCain's attempts to discuss this it is the fact they are under investigation in multiple states and possiably may change the outcome of this election.

Re: Voter fraud, a GOP bete noire, rears its head again in the presidential race

proudrepublican — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:34:54 -0000

First let me say I am not in favor of preventing people who should vote from voting. Unlike you I am not quoting a "rolling stone" article but rather listen to the claims by both Republicans and Democrats who say ACORN is violating the law and may steal this election. I am not talking about 4 or 8 years ago I am talking about right now. The election is going to be close and I do believe that 200 well placed illegal votes could change the outcome in NM from the White House to Congressional races.

Reading your comments is laughable because if this organization was supporting Republicans you would scream "racism" and want an investigation!

Finally your example of the guy from NM, since the Secretary of State is and has been a Democrat you might take up the "claim" with them or ACORN since they are really one in the same.

Re: Let’s talk about ‘verbal terrorism’

proudrepublican — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:20:42 -0000

Ben,

You actually seem like a decent sort and I’m able to take you at face value. I appreciate that. Almost all the others are just filled with hate and venom, there’s hardly any reason to address their points. They seem entirely and exclusively focused on calling me some kind of name. That’s all I get out of their comments. It’s all anyone gets out of them. I suppose it makes them feel better. I just don’t come from that kind of background. (I actually think many of them are symptomatic of what’s wrong with American discourse today—what George Will calls the American political distemper.) Anyway, I do want to answer you final thoughtful reply.

You’re the first person to concede that by the end of the 60s we’re no longer talking about race, and that cultural issues had come to the forefront. I appreciate your honesty, and it’s an important marker that allows us to focus in on perhaps a narrower line of disagreement—who knows, one that we may resolve. You said:

My contention is that the cultural issues to which you refer were not
major issues to voters in the South in 1964, and were not the impetus
behind the campaigns of Strom Thurmond and George Wallace, nor were
they the impetus behind the deep South flipping from the Democrats to
Barry Goldwater. My contention is that the stance taken by Democrats
on the civil rights issue caused the switch to occur at the presidential level.

Okay, so we’re talking about 1964. I have several points on this:

1) My party and I are moving targets in this discussion. Terms, regions, alleged motives and actors are thrown in and then pulled out of the discussions with blinding speed, depending on how the discussion seems to be moving.
2) A favorite almost knee-jerk, hip pocket cliché some people whip out is the “Southern Strategy” (with which the user tries to imply—although they never come out and say exactly how—that some kind of tactic, stratagem, or ploy was used in some kind of sinister way that caused the most evilly motivated voters to somehow vote Republican. This is never fleshed out.)
3) Strom Thurmond was a Democrat. He was a Democrat when he left the Democratic Convention in 1948 (probably bewildered because it was the same party that had supported the Ku Klux Klan as recently as 1924---keeping in mind that that’s the same distance of time as 1984 is from us, and I remember 1984 pretty doggone well) to run as a Dixiecrat, i.e. Southern Democrat for President. He was a Democrat when he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He left the party and became a Republican subsequently, but you have to remember he denounced segregation and in 1968, he supported Nixon, and not fellow Democrat Wallace.
4) George Wallace was a Democrat. Always. He was the leading Democrat vote-getter in the 1972 Presidential Primaries. The only thing to keep him from finishing as the top popular vote-getter was that he got shot.
5) The “Deep South” you refer to was actually all lost by Republicans in 1968—with the single exception of South Carolina where Thurmond campaigned for a Republican platform that did not embrace segregation or Wallace themes. But this is a key year they are referring to when many modern Democrats blurt out “Southern Strategy.” We carried the rest of the South, except Texas. But that merely means we carried the part of the South where we had a good deal of strength already in Presidential elections. Eisenhower had carried Tennessee, Florida, Texas and Virginia twice each. Nixon in 1960 had carried Florida, Tennessee, Virginia and even Mississippi had defeated Kennedy with a slate of unpledged electors—and this was long before the 1964 Civil Rights Act, let alone the VRA. It’s impossible to blame Republicans for “racism” for that fact, or any of the other losses the Democrats were beginning to pile up not just in the South, but in border states like Oklahoma, Kentucky and Missouri where they had long dominated. Political scientists and historians point out the psephological trends visible in the 30s and 40s as reactions to the New Deal, and what many Southerners and
Midwesterners and Westerners viewed as creeping socialism, rightly or wrongly.

Engel v. Vitale, which struck down school prayer was handed down in 1962, and brought outrage from middle class conservatives. And there were a number of liberal, rulings prior to 1964, and shortly thereafter (Miranda, 1966) that had “Impeach Earl Warren” billboards popping up all over middle America, including the South. The Great Society programs which foisted government on American life in a way unmatched since the New Deal, and which in its permanency and cost vastly outstripped the New Deal, are also completely ignored by most “crossfire-styled” blog commentators on this. (Frankly I doubt very many of them know much about these things at all.) Again, though, it’s clear you are not like that and enjoy a serious discussion. My point is that there are numerous influences on political attitudes that were taking shape in the mid-60s that had nothing to do with race. People in Jefferson City, Missouri were mad as hell about watching out-of-control riots on TV every night, with no one able to get a handle on it. Some of the riots were in fact race riots in the North, but most were about Vietnam, and many were just about student “agitation.” When we look for “race” to answer every single thing that ever happened in the 60s, we not only miss a hell of a lot of clearly documented impacts on political attitudes and voting shifts, we miss a tremendous amount of American history. We disserve our fellow citizens if we narrow our discussions to such inaccurate pigeon-holing, substituting clichés and catch-phrases for history.
6) In the first election of the 70s, Nixon squared off against McGovern, who embodied everything I’ve just discussed. That election wasn’t about race any more than 1968 was. Nixon carried all 11 Southern states, and 49 of 50.
7) Jimmy Carter came right back and carried ten of eleven states, plus Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia, Maryland. If the Democrats had lost the South because of race it—and the Republicans had gained it as part of their “empire” would have stayed lost and gained. It didn’t. Because it wasn’t about appeals to race. Republicans made no appeals to race. Here’s probably what happened. And you have sort of talked around it, but not quite hit it.

As the immigration waves of the early late 1800s and early 1900s were reaping its generational benefits, the big cities began to take on a bigger role in Democratic politics—outfits like Tammany Hall had always been powerful, but the rural agrarian South and West could dominate at conventions. This tension grew as the numbers began to grow even. People like Al Smith and FDR were nominated and that was okay, sort of, with rural Democrats because though they seemed highly concentrated on urban concerns and big government, they were Democrat enough to be at the very best (or if you’re a Democrat of that era, at the very worst) indifferent to race and racism. But because of this shift toward the cities, Republican strength began to grow—anomalies like Warren Harding carrying Tennessee even went little noticed, but Republican returns got a lot better. The Depression and Hoover set them back, but FDR’s excesses saw the numbers start growing again by the 40s.

By the end of the 40s there were the first stirrings of the consciences of some Democrats on race. Republicans did not do anything other than watch them. Keep in mind what were big deals, and big revelations to Democrats had long since been advocated by Republicans. (Truman integrated the Armed Forces eight years after the Republican Platform called for it.) Eisenhower continued to make gains. By the time the Civil Rights Act occurred, with Republicans overwhelmingly supporting it, other factors mentioned above were becoming stronger and stronger—driving wedge after wedge between the modern liberal Democrat and the populist Democrat that was a holdover from the post-Reconstruction era.

Here’s where I get to the nugget of historical fact that I think we’ll agree on: The Southern Populist Democrat by the mid to late 1960s no longer agreed with the modern liberal Democrat, who now controlled his party, on anything. Economics, welfare, the courts, prayer in schools, rioting in the streets, law and order, national defense priorities, “tying the hands” of the cops (a big issue in the 60s) and many, many others. If he also no longer agreed with the Democrats on racial justice and Civil Rights, it certainly cannot be said that the Republican Party agreed with him. Nowhere did Republicans repudiate their 110-year (at that time) history on civil rights. The Southern Populist no longer had a Democratic Party apparatus that would, as an institution—nationally for at least 125 years, and regionally for another 15-20 years—stand up for him on segregation and racism.

So the Republican Party wouldn’t either. So what. The Grand Old Party would stand with him on economics, welfare, the courts, prayer in schools, rioting in the streets, law and order, national defense priorities, “tying the hands” of the cops (a big issue in the 60s) and many, many others.

He switched.

That is not the fault of the Republican Party. Republicans made no great racist overtures to him or anyone else. The party grew in the South, in the Midwest and in the West based on the fact it was more in step with the Middle Class, what the modern liberal would call “bourgeois” value, than was his old party.

That’s the long of it. (I would say long and short of it, but that would be wrong.)

Dan

Re: Voter fraud, a GOP bete noire, rears its head again in the presidential race

proudrepublican — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 08:40:10 -0000

First of all the only "panic" in my voice is knowing there are people who could care less how someone gets elected and they care more about electing a person then protecting the process.

Nice try though, I have never been against low income or minorities voting, if you read any history Republicans have always worked hard for this demographic. I do believe when an organization exploits them all so it can break the law and register thousands of false, illegal and or fake individuals that is wrong and sad. If you truly claim to be for minorities and low income voters you should be up in arms over ACORN and their desire to exploit not only the process but these folks.

My only mention of party is because if this organization was working for Republicans there would be an outcry against them, not so when working for the "chosen one" though.

Re: Common Cause: GOP fraud claims ‘simply inaccurate’

proudrepublican — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 14:37:54 -0000

As is usual from some of you the fact that an organization is under investigation for breaking the law when it comes to voter registration is of no concern to some of you, but if it was a conservative group doing this you would be up in arms. Voter fraud happens just go look in Roswell where a person plead to doing it and as we see so many questionable registrations being turned in by ONE organization it raises a question that shold be answered and has not been.

We should all be angry when ever anyone violates the very process that makes our country great, but as this reporter and some who get on here, you are more concerned with electing Democrats no matter what the cost.

Re: ACLU demands investigation of N.M. GOP; Bernalillo County Clerk (updated)

proudrepublican — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 14:41:38 -0000

Where was the ACLU when the registraion forms where found in a drug bust in Albuquerque? Oh yeah they could care less because it didn't advance their desire to elect Democrats regardless of the cost.

The ACLU is a disgusting group that has one goal and one goal only that is to win races for Democrats and go after conservatives across the country.

Jeeter you are a real piece of work, can you offer anything other then hate speech! But maybe that is to much for your pea sized brain!!!!

Re: ACLU demands investigation of N.M. GOP; Bernalillo County Clerk (updated)

proudrepublican — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:13:16 -0000

Jeeter funny you would mention "facts" you wouldn't know a fact if it hit you in the head. Because the ACLU comes to the aid of Rush or the KKK (founded as the military wing of the Democrat Party) doesn't make them right.

You can keep attacking me and as usual you are wrong with your comments about me but that is ok you continue to spew hate and prove why Liberals like you are bad for our country. Liberals always talk about "tolerance" and yet you are the least tolerant of people who disagree with you. Keep hiding behind your log on name because it only proves that no one will take some one seriously who "hides" what it is they are trying to say. Keep up the good work Jeeter!

Dan

Re: Caging the vote?

proudrepublican — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:44:18 -0000

I am shocked at the title and story. The only person who talks about "vote caging" is some local PI? That doesn't raise any red flags for the reporter or the editors of this story? He also says he was "contacted on behalf of the RNC" yet the actual person who did the call says later on:

"Stefan declined to say whether or not he was recruiting on behalf of RNC, saying, “I don’t fully know who’s involved."

This is clearly a slanted article trying to do harm the day before the election and the NMI should be ashamed that it printed this as an actual "news" story.

Re: Now is not the time for the GOP to move leftward

proudrepublican — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:14:26 -0000

Clearly you have no idea what I was talking about but that is understandable. I have not heard the comments by this Congressman from Georgia so I will save my response until I read them. Clearly you and I will have a difference of opinion concerning what people who are "talk radio hosts" say and what folks in the mainstream media say. Do you remember Dan Rather and Bryant Gumble to name 2? How about people like Alec Baldwin and Barbara Streisand when it comes to Hollywood Liberals. You don't hear Ted Nugent, Chuck Norris or Hank WIlliams Jr. talking about leaving like they did. As far as I can tell the majority of Conservative Republicans have talked about working with President-Elect Obama to make America a better place, something the Liberlas refused to do either time George W. Bush won his election.

I am sure you will respond with some hate filled comments and I expect nothing less, but that is the difference between you and me I offer facts to back up my comments you offer, well only comments!

Have a great day and by the way thank a Vet for their service to this country, it was their hard work that allows folks like you to say the things you do..........

Re: Now is not the time for the GOP to move leftward

proudrepublican — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:09:36 -0000

As usual you have zero ability to comprehend what I wrote. Just because someone puts it on a blog doesn't make it a fact and I said I would find out. I never compared the alleged comments from the Georgia Congressman to those of actors and musicians I was using them as examples, but clearly that was to difficult for you to understand. What about my examples of Dan Rather and Bryant Gumble I guess you missed those. As far as the Congressman from Georgia's comments let's look at Congressman Mirtha's comments of the President or the young Marines he lies about. What about President-Elect Obama saying our troops are "bombing communities and killing innocent civilian", none of which has been proven. But I am sure you will find a way to dismiss those comments. When I find an independent source to verify the comments of the Congressman from Georgia then I will respond. Keep drinking the punch and I look forward to your continued attacks on Republicans and your defense of this new administration.

Re: Now is not the time for the GOP to move leftward

proudrepublican — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:37:55 -0000

Wow, you really don't get it do you? Rush and Hannity are talk show hosts and their job is to push the envelope, not the same for "main stream" media and that is the example. I am looking into his comments and if he said them, I will play your game, he is wrong for that. What about President-Elect Obamas comments about our military no comment from you? Your desire to just pass over my examples speaks loudly..... By the way there is no need to use vulgarity it makes you look small let's avoid those words.... The painting with a broad brush has to do with the overwhelming comments by liberals who wish to attack, judging by your comments I didn't paint with a broad brush rather was right on with pin point accuracy.

Re: Now is not the time for the GOP to move leftward

proudrepublican — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:25:53 -0000

Quill

The "clear" Democrat victory, if we are so wrong then how come the losses are not what was predicted and let me add the Prop 8 loss in California.

Re: Now is not the time for the GOP to move leftward

proudrepublican — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:29:31 -0000

Thomas_James

I was agains the Patriot Act and expressed so to the President in person! I am not and never have approved of growing government at any level. As a matter of fact I am on record trying to shrink government and give more power to the government closes to the people (City Council, School Board, County Commission, etc).

Re: Now is not the time for the GOP to move leftward

proudrepublican — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:45:18 -0000

Thank you for the response. I do believe Heather Wilson did a good job but as I am sure you can appreciate I do not agree with her or almost anyone 100% of the time. I am a proud Republican because of the founding principals of my party. That doesn't mean there hasn't been some who have strayed or been flat out wrong, my article is about getting back to what I believe is actually important and that is the simple principals we should believe if we are really conservative. I appreciate your comments and look forward to more of them in the future.

Re: Now is not the time for the GOP to move leftward

proudrepublican — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:07:55 -0000

babyfatt you must be kidding? I am not going to reprint my article on the history of the Democrat Party but I encourage you to read it. Those racist you speak of all were Democrats and almost everyone of them died a Democrat. The racist hate filled comments you speak of continue to come from the Democrat side of the isle as did the KKK as a wing of the Democrat Party.

Remember Dr. Kind and Dr. Abernathy were both Republicans as were the founders of the NAACP, but I am sure yo will have an answer for that as well.

I would encourage you to read a little about history and the so called "southern strategy" and look at stuff from folks like Michael Baron who talk about why the South went for Republicans. I am sure there are some racist folks out there but it had to do with secularism and the move to the hard left by the democrats on things like abortion and prayer in schools. Stop trying to spit out tlaking points that are false, no matter how many times people say them they still are false.........

Re: Spending, spending and more spending in Santa Fe

proudrepublican — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 16:42:29 -0000

Why are you such a hater? Try to be nice for just a few minutes? I guess this is a sign of the coming trouble the bible talks about:

Obama elected President

Thomas_James saying something kind of nice about me!

What's next the sun rising in the west?

Re: Spending, spending and more spending in Santa Fe

proudrepublican — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:25:00 -0000

Jeeter not that it matters to you but I did not vote for most of these budgets and at times was a lone voice against this spending. I do not read Monahan because he is one of if not the worst blogger in NM maybe the country but that probably explains why you do read him.

My reason for not reading him is proven with the comments you credit him with. He has attacked me for not voting for these budgets in the past and how soon he forgets. I can tell you that usually most if not all Republicans in the House voted against these crazy spending ideas and we were attacked by people like Monahan and yourself for those votes, now that we are proven correct you want to accuse us of being part of the problem? Come on!

Apparently you care about my "tirades" because you seem to comment every time I write and I welcome your comments. And to call Joe Monahan a Republican has to be one of the funniest comments I have ever read.

Maybe Monahan could learn from people like Heath Haussamen who take the time to disclose who is paying them and their blog unlike Monahan who takes money from individuals and causes then writes about those issues or attacks the people his financial supporters ask him to, he is nothing more then the "National Enquirer" of the NM bloggers and has ZERO credability...........